Boost is C++. On Thu, Nov 6, 2008 at 5:42 AM, Peter Gebauer < [EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Hey there! > > There are some alternatives, some like automatic generation like Swig, > Boost, etc, some like Pyrex, I prefer to write Python extensions in C using > the standard Python C-implementation API. PyGame, being written in C, is > also easy to access. > As for C++, I don't know of any specific C++ API's, but then again I don't > use C++ at all so I haven't looked. > There's also the option of doing the reverse scenario, embedding instead of > extending, you'll have to see what fits your project best. > > /Peter > > On 2008-11-05 (Wed) 08:29, Matt Pearson wrote: > > i agree, does the wrapper have a name, or is it on the python/pygame > sites > > > > On Wed, Nov 5, 2008 at 8:13 AM, René Dudfield <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > > > yeah, best to use both! Use each tool where it is best at - and get > > > best of both worlds! > > > > > > cu, > > > > > > On Thu, Nov 6, 2008 at 12:53 AM, Peter Gebauer > > > <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > > Hi guys! > > > > > > > > I agree, just wanted to add that many iterations over trivial code > > > benefits > > > > (speed-wise) tremendously from being written in C and accessed in > Python, > > > or > > > > at least that is my experience. :) > > > > Guess you have to weigh it against the added complexity of having to > > > compile > > > > C code, maybe for mulitple platforms, etc. > > > > > > > > On 2008-11-05 (Wed) 13:57, Greg Ewing wrote: > > > >> Patrick Mullen wrote: > > > >>> On Tue, Nov 4, 2008 at 12:55 AM, Greg Ewing < > > > [EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > >>> > > > >>>> The only way to improve speed is to re-code the cpu-intensive > > > >>>> parts using something more efficent, such as C or Pyrex. > > > >>> > > > >>> Or, of course, write better python code if possible in those parts. > > > >> > > > >> Yes, certainly -- finding a better algorithm is always > > > >> the best form of optimization! > > > >> > > > >> -- > > > >> Greg > > > >> > > > > > > > >
